Evicted at Gunpoint by Wells Fargo - But She OWNS The House and has a Court Order Not To Evict !

Wells Fargo works very hard to keep homeowners in their homes whenever possible. In the case of Ms. Black, Wells Fargo is the trustee for the trust
that owned the mortgage loan secured by her home. As the trustee, we perform certain administrative duties on behalf of the trust, but we are not
responsible for making servicing or foreclosure decisions. Those decisions are made by the mortgage loan servicer, which in this case is Carrington
Mortgage Services, LLC.

Ms. Black defaulted on her loan in August 2009. Carrington made numerous offers of assistance over the past three years, which included a loan
modification, relocation assistance, and agreements to various stays and continuances. Even with those efforts, keeping Ms. Black in her home
unfortunately wasn’t possible in this case. We have been in contact with Carrington and received confirmation that (i) the foreclosure and eviction
were both performed lawfully and professionally, (ii) there was no automatic stay in place at the time of the eviction, and (iii) during the
foreclosure process and before the eviction, numerous attempts were made to help Ms. Black.

Not defending the bank here, but if what they say is true, then the eviction could very well be legal.

One out of seven US citizens are homeless, but there are twenty four empty homes for every one homeless US citizen. Greed, anybody? It all boils down
to greed. Pure and simple. This is greed. People want MORE when they already have more than enough for themselves. Why do people feel the need to
hoard things that they have no use for? F*** the banks and f*** the politicians and f*** the terrorist US government.

Originally posted by Dystopiaphiliac
One out of seven US citizens are homeless, but there are twenty four empty homes for every one homeless US citizen. Greed, anybody? It all boils down
to greed. Pure and simple. This is greed. People want MORE when they already have more than enough for themselves. Why do people feel the need to
hoard things that they have no use for? F*** the banks and f*** the politicians and f*** the terrorist US government.

Those are prety BIG numbers, would you have a link / source to back that statement. I am not saying it isnt true, but 1 in 7....that would be like
14.28% of the population...seems a bit high IMO

Now I know that the year is not the same, but the increase would have to be very pretty extreme to reach 14% from 0.2%. Your statement also implies
that there are over 15 MILION vacant houses in the US (15 264 408). I couldnt find any official number online but I thinks that is a lot of
houses....If that's the case, then maybe some of those should be converted to Homeless shelters.

************

Back on subject now. I think that even if this poor lady did owe money for her mortgage, and even without the court order, the use of force was
uncalled for. THAT is the big problem here and I hope someone is held accountable for this.

Originally posted by crankyoldman
Here is the interesting thing. If she were on the street, sick, and struggling, it is assumed the same exact same "police" would or should, help
her.

They helped Kelly Thomas out of life and he was sick and on the street.

Indeed, that is why I used the word assumed, not guaranteed. The interesting thing about the police is how one sided things are. They are allowed to
kill you, in fact they are encouraged, if they feel unsafe. This woman, in her home, with a valid court order, felt really, really unsafe when the
jackboots showed up, but she is only allowed to obey an unlawful arrest. Her recourse is, well, to go back to the same useless court, and ask the same
scumbag "police" to resolve the matter, while WF keeps trying to figure out some legal, or other, means of taking the gdamn house from her, a woman
who is only "going to die anyway." Remember, the police make mistakes, you commit crimes. Had Kelly's death not been filmed it was just a mistake,
they feared for their lives and, per policy, killed him accordingly.

Folks should really understand, you NEVER own your home, Never. You cannot get alloidal title to your house, so the "court" will always have
jurisdiction over the home. In truth you do, or can, own the box on the land, but the land will never be yours, it is held in trust by the corporation
of the US gov. for the Queen of England: your landlord. The scary thing is you do not have title to your own body, you do not have alloidal title to
the body you inhabit, it is held as collateral by the Fed, it is what gives these thug policy enforcement agents the right to do as they please with
it.

I have vague recollections of a similar story I heard. Which part of Alabama was that in? I was a resident from 1992 until 2006.

We were in Huntsville, and it was in that time frame. The guy hightailed it to central Mississippi so Sheriff-in-law could protect him. He didn't
hide quite as well as he thought he did.

He actually went to the Huntsville cops and told them he wanted to turn himself in rather than have us catch him, they told him to wait on the bench,
and he got cold feet and ran for it, which didn't help his later arguments.

Originally posted by PMNOrlando
This is the same Sheriff that took a Pro-Obama bus to a Catholic Church, also here in Orlando, FL...

Orange County has a long and checkered history of flamboyantly arsehole Sheriffs. Kevin Beary comes to mind. Among many other things fat boy did was
to use NCIC to track down people who wrote letters to the editor critical of him.

Is there proof she had a judicial order for them not to evict? If she did, and if the duration of the order hadn't passed, I really don't see how
any other factors matter. A judicial order trumps the bank's perceived property rights as far as I know, does it not? Isn't violating a judicial
order a huge no no? Please enlighten me if I'm wrong.

Wells Fargo are job creators.. They need to be de-regulated so they can keep creating hundreds of thousands of jobs monthly. They pay the lowest
tax rate in 60 years, so they should be really really creating jobs at a fast clip now... You just wait....

You're a sheriff and spit in the face of a federal judge, you get US Marshals or FBI in force, with rifles, maybe with NG backing. There would be no
dissent. The fact that the Orange County sheriff isn't getting butt poked in the federal slam would on face value indicate there's more to it than
meets the eye.

Sad indeed they did not even have the decency to wait for her to die of cancer.

Yes there is something going on, that sheriff was doing his job at the behest of wells fargo a mega bank, which supersedes such silly things as the
law of the land, and judges and courts. Somebody said that wels fargo probably bought the whole area for a developer to use, that is probably to be
the likeliest reason why they did not wait till she croaked.

Thats why they call it a "morth"+ "gage" people, which come out to mean a "death"+ "promise" or "death"+ "contract", anyways basically
its all a scheme, and what it means is that none of you actually own your homes, your just borrowing it for the time being or as its seen fit from the
people and entities who own it and the land. Those people and entities being the landlords ie banks and even government, and the dept system is
just a reconfiguration of the serf and landlord system they had in the middle ages, and even back in Rome, and even long before then. But worry not
I am sure the "criminal justice system" will kick in and the criminals will get there justice.

A thread like this, in which the participants have gone to lengths to find more information is what makes ATS what it is. Instead of relying on just
her, the bank's or the sheriff's department's accounts members went out and dug for information. Sadly it is a reflection on our free press;
self-serving journalist that push a narrative because they want to see change rather than report the truth so the people can seek the change through
information.

I have not the powers of ATS Gods, but I believe a well deserved applause is in order for those who sought information, regardless of the position
they may hold on the matter and presented it for anyone to make up their own minds.

Alright my gushing for the moment is over with and now back to the matter at hand.

It seems that the oft used term of 'ownership' is key here. From documents posted and statements, the home is still under mortgage. While she may
own the home, she is contractually obligated to fulfill terms. If we are to believe the PR statement from WF, then it seems they have 'run out of
options'. While gut-wrenching as the procedure of evicting someone out of a home is, contract law is important and if the contract was breached then
she has an uphill battle.

From the looks of things is the previous loan holder either sold off the loan or WF bought it out and they are now the principle lien holders to her
mortgage. This will have to end up in court (November 13th I believe) before we are purvey to all the facts of the matter.

We move to the sheriffs dealings in this. Her account is quite specific; officer of the law had a gun to her head, finger on the trigger and no
safety on. Quite the observation in my estimation and is, to my belief, a sensationalized account of what actually happened. While not entirely
impossible that the account is true, the overall actions taken by the sheriff's department in serving the eviction notice needs to be held accountable
and the truth should be brought to bear.

I believe as more continue to get to the truth rather than the he-said, she-said account of this, the better off we all will be and the knee-jerk
reactionaries will subside. It is cases such as these that remind me of John Adams when even calling for the independence of the colonies stood up
for the notion of law and defended the British on trial for their part in the "Boston Massacre" incident. Prudence and patience are needed here so
that it doesn't become a witch-hunt of either side.

Post Script:

After some digging, it seems that Mrs. Black filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy. Here is where the matter will ultimately get settled. If she (or her
lawyer at the time) didn't list her assets such as her home as part of the bankruptcy then again, she has an uphill battle. Also, even if after the
bankruptcy if she failed to follow the new terms then again, her battle is mounting against her.

Where it gets interesting is if the bankruptcy proceedings listed the original trustee of her mortgage and then later Wells Fargo bought that loan, I
am not sure how that all works out in the world of bankruptcy courts.

My only real question at this point is the court-order she is claiming that she had a stay. It would seem, in her defense that someone who is going
to bat for her would post for the world this order. In time we will find out all the information.

I will wait and see if a nugget of truth arises about some debt that Wells Fargo is owed in her name. Most likely she took out a loan for medical
treatments or something related to her illness, but that is just speculation.

There had to be some reason for Wells Fargo to take her home. They would have to have documents showing a judgement in their favor or loan documents
etc.

If Wells Fargo was fabricating debt to steal houses I think it would be lynching time for some exec's.

Breaking the law for disobeying the order not to evict. I would hope they would get charged with some kind of unlawful use of force pulling a
weapon when they weren't supposed to be there in the first place.

Yup... breaking and entering, vandalism, destruction of private property, kidnapping... just to name a few.

Quote: Here is a response that I received from Wells Fargo this morning:

Hi Keith, thank you for sharing your concerns. Wells Fargo works very hard to keep homeowners in their homes whenever possible. Ms. Black defaulted on
her mortgage loan in August 2009. We are the Trustee for a trust which owned that loan. As Trustee, we don't make foreclosure decisions; those are
made by the mortgage loan servicer. There was no automatic stay in place and no laws were violated during the foreclosure process. During the
foreclosure process, numerous attempts were made to help Ms. Black in the form of offers of relocation assistance, connections to community resources,
and numerous stays and continuances at various stages of the process. Thanks, Henrik UNQUOTE

That expressly stated she owed money on the mortgage and defaulted on it....I am confused at what you are getting at now....

She originally had the loan with a company that went under. Wells Fargo became the principal trustee of the original loan, but the foreclosure was
already in place. While on its face the tact of how Wells Fargo handled the situation seems crass, I suspect there is a lot more to this story other
than a dying woman with terminal cancer held at gun point with no safety and finger on the trigger....

The confusion could be related to her Chapter 7 bankruptcy. It could be possible that she thought the bankruptcy relinquished her obligation to the
debt, or she failed to list her home as an asset, or any other number of reasons for this. I think once the courts hear this and it is all laid to
bear, we will have a better understanding of it.

Glad to see you questioning and not reacting though. It is easy with a story like this to call for pitch-forks and torches to take the steps of the
local Wells Fargo, but as it seems, there is much, much more to this story that is hidden from our eyes.

I will still contend that I am not fully in the tank regarding her view on how they served the notice and not sure if the original stay was still even
in effect. We have yet to see that too. So many questions with nary an ounce answered yet many have already made up their minds regarding this.

edit on 2-11-2012 by ownbestenemy because: Good lord....hear, here....there, their and they're.....

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.